Chicago Tribune Co. v. Bridgestone/Firestone, Inc.

After 18-year-old Daniel Van Etten died in a rollover crash, his parents filed a wrongful-death lawsuit against Bridgestone/Firestone, Inc. (Bridgestone) (defendant), alleging that it had negligently designed and manufactured the tires on the vehicle in question, causing the crash. Fifteen documents produced in the matter were covered by an umbrella protective order and filed under seal. The matter settled soon after the close of discovery. After the settlement, several members of the press, including Chicago Tribune Co., (press) (plaintiffs) moved to intervene, seeking the unsealing of the fifteen documents. Bridgestone objected to the unsealing of several documents, alleging that they contained trade secrets. The district court ordered the unsealing of the documents in question, finding that Bridgestone had failed to show that the sealing of the documents was necessitated by a compelling government interest and was narrowly tailored to that interest. The court of appeals granted Bridgestone’s emergency motion for a stay pending its appeal. In support of its motion, Bridgestone argued that the district court should have applied a good-cause standard instead of the compelling-government-interest standard. The press argued that its right of access to the sealed documents derived from the First Amendment to the United States Constitution and from the common-law right to copy and inspect judicial documents, both of which are subject to the compelling-government-interest standard.